Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

We need a government that works

US Capitol

Each branch of government needs to get serious about restoring the public's trust.

Andrey Denisyuk/Getty Images

Frazier is an assistant professor at the Crump College of Law at St. Thomas University and a Tarbell fellow.

The first — and really only — order of business for the government is to solve problems beyond the grasp of a single person or a small community. In exchange for that service, we the people surrender some of our income and liberty. This grand bargain breaks down when the government decides it’s got other things to do besides take care of everything from our sewage to our space debris.

The longer the government falls short of our expectations, the more likely the people will be to opt out of their own obligations, such as voting. This dangerous tit-for-tat is hard to reverse. A less effective government sparks a less dutiful public, which makes it harder for the government to perform, and so on.


That’s precisely why the first agenda item for every politician who wins in November ought to be basic government work. For Congress, it’s time to get serious about regulating artificial intelligence. A series of performative hearings in which the celebrities of AI, such as Sam Altman, made flashy appearances on Capitol Hill have yet to generate meaningful legislation. The AI Policy Roadmap recently released by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and three other senators did little to assuage concerns that Congress is happy to let states lead on AI governance.

A handful of small bills might address specific AI issues, but — absent passage of comprehensive legislation — the public is right to question if lawmakers are taking their part of the deal seriously.

For the president, the relative tranquility of the present is the proper time to prepare for future, inevitable emergencies. The federal government’s response to Covid-19 was far from perfect. From the initial confusion over who should wear a mask and when, to prolonged and troubling efforts to quash debate over the proper response, there is tremendous room for improvement.

The nature of our interconnected and global world means that another crisis will unfortunately emerge sooner than later. Imagine the good that would come about from the president overseeing massive emergency drills in preparation of threats like the deployment of a bioweapon. Picture how much smoother the Covie response would have been if the American people had preexisting stores of emergency supplies. These efforts are flashy but they are what’s required by an effective government.

For the courts, the integration of AI into our legal system should not be left to chance. State and federal courts alike have clogged dockets and insufficient support for individuals who cannot afford a lawyer but also cannot afford to lose whatever claim brought them before the court. AI will not and cannot entirely solve those issues, but the technology should be used to the greatest extent possible to help those who too commonly find that our legal system fails to provide the justice it promises.

None of these initiatives are partisan. And all of them go to the purpose of the government: solving problems. There’s a long list of similar, basic projects that would go a long way toward making the government more effective and efficient. The longer this grows, the greater the odds of (even more) discontent and distrust. That’s why candidates across the spectrum should focus less on short-term, shiny projects and much more on what will make American lives easier both now and for decades to come.

The latter kind of project won’t get headlines on Fox or MSNBC, but it will keep the wheels of government turning, which is no small feat given decades of rust.

Read More

Just the Facts: Impact of the Big Beautiful Bill on Health Care

U.S. President Donald Trump takes the stage during a reception for Republican members of the House of Representatives in the East Room of the White House on July 22, 2025 in Washington, DC. Trump thanked GOP lawmakers for passing the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

Getty Images, Chip Somodevilla

Just the Facts: Impact of the Big Beautiful Bill on Health Care

The Fulcrum strives to approach news stories with an open mind and skepticism, striving to present our readers with a broad spectrum of viewpoints through diligent research and critical thinking. As best we can, we remove personal bias from our reporting and seek a variety of perspectives in both our news gathering and selection of opinion pieces. However, before our readers can analyze varying viewpoints, they must have the facts.

What are the new Medicaid work requirements, and are they more lenient or more restrictive than what previously existed?

Keep ReadingShow less
U.S. Constitution
Imagining constitutions
Douglas Sacha/Getty Images

A Bold Civic Renaissance for America’s 250th

Every September 17, Americans mark Constitution Day—the anniversary of the signing of our nation’s foundational charter in 1787. The day is often commemorated with classroom lessons and speaking events, but it is more than a ceremonial anniversary. It is an invitation to ask: What does it mean to live under a constitution that was designed as a charge for each generation to study, debate, and uphold its principles? This year, as we look toward the semiquincentennial of our nation in 2026, the question feels especially urgent.

The decade between 1776 and 1787 was defined by a period of bold and intentional nation and national identity building. In that time, the United States declared independence, crafted its first national government, won a war to make their independence a reality, threw out the first government when it failed, and forged a new federal government to lead the nation. We stand at a similar inflection point. The coming decade, from the nation’s semiquincentennial in 2026 to the Constitution’s in 2037, offers a parallel opportunity to reimagine and reinvigorate our American civic culture. Amid the challenges we face today, there’s an opportunity to study, reflect, and prepare to write the next chapters in our American story—it is as much about the past 250 years, as it is about the next 250 years. It will require the same kind of audacious commitment to building for the future that was present at the nation’s outset.

Keep ReadingShow less
Texas redistricting maps

Two bills have been introduced to Congress that aim to ban mid-decade redistricting on the federal level and contain provisions making an exception for mid-decade redistricting.

Tamir Kalifa/Getty Images

Congress Bill Spotlight: Anti-Rigging Act, Banning Mid-Decade Redistricting As Texas and California Are Attempting

Trump claims Republicans are “entitled” to five more Texas House seats.

Context: in the news

In August, the Republican-controlled Texas state legislature approved a rare “mid-decade” redistricting for U.S. House seats, with President Donald Trump’s encouragement.

Keep ReadingShow less
Independent Madness- or How the Cheshire Cat Can Slay the Gerrymander

The Cheshire Cat (John Tenniel) Devouring the Gerrymander (Elkanah Tisdale )

Independent Madness- or How the Cheshire Cat Can Slay the Gerrymander

America has a long, if erratic, history of expanding its democratic franchise. Over the last two centuries, “representation” grew to embrace former slaves, women, and eighteen-year-olds, while barriers to voting like literacy tests and outright intimidation declined. Except, that is, for one key group, Independents and Third-party voters- half the electorate- who still struggle to gain ballot access and exercise their authentic democratic voice.

Let’s be realistic: most third parties aren't deluding themselves about winning a single-member election, even if they had equal ballot access. “Independents” – that sprawling, 40-percent-strong coalition of diverse policy positions, people, and gripes – are too diffuse to coalesce around a single candidate. So gerrymanderers assume they will reluctantly vote for one of the two main parties. Relegating Independents to mere footnotes in the general election outcome, since they’re also systematically shut out of party primaries, where 9 out of 10 elections are determined.

Keep ReadingShow less